45 research outputs found

    Ludovic Halbert, L’avantage mĂ©tropolitain, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, Collection « La ville en dĂ©bat, », 2010, 143 pages.

    Get PDF
    Comment pourrait-on dĂ©finir une mĂ©tropole ? Et si cette catĂ©gorie se rĂ©vĂšle pertinente, quels sont les facteurs de sa prospĂ©rité ? L’auteur de l’avantage mĂ©tropolitain s’appuie sur l’économie territoriale pour dĂ©crire et analyser ce qui fait l’avantage Ă©conomique des rĂ©gions mĂ©tropolitaines dans la mondialisation. A la fois essai sur les politiques d’amĂ©nagement et synthĂšse des travaux portant sur ces questions, cet ouvrage propose une vision territorialisĂ©e et systĂ©mique du phĂ©nomĂšne de mĂ©tr..

    Participation and Co-creation in Citizen Science

    Full text link
    Podeu consultar el llibre complet a: http://hdl.handle.net/2445/173349Citizen science practices have different frames to general scientific research – the adoption of participatory methods in research design has long been pursued in citizen science projects. The citizen science research design process should be inclusive, flexible, and adaptive in all its stages, from research question formulation to evidence-based collective results. Some citizen science initiatives adopt strategies that include co-creation techniques and methodologies from a wide variety of disciplines and practices. In this sense, the will to collaborate between researchers and other stakeholders is not new. It is traditionally found in public participation in science, including participatory action research (PAR) and the involvement of civil society organisations (CSOs) in research, as well as in mediatory structures, such as science shops. This chapter critically reviews methodologies, techniques, skills, and participation based on experiences of civic involvement and co-creation in research and discusses their limitations and potential improvements. Our focus is on the reflexivity approach and infrastructure needed to design citizen science projects, as well as associated key roles. Existing tools that can be used to enhance and improve citizen participation at each stage of the research process will also be explored. We conclude with a series of reflections on participatory practices

    Broad and narrow personality traits as markers of one-time and repeated suicide attempts: A population-based study

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Studying personality traits with the potential to differentiate between individuals engaging in suicide attempts of different degrees of severity could help us to understand the processes underlying the link of personality and nonfatal suicidal behaviours and to identify at-risk groups. One approach may be to examine whether narrow, i.e., lower-order personality traits may be more useful than their underlying, broad personality trait dimensions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We investigated qualitative and quantitative differences in broad and narrow personality traits between one-time and repeated suicide attempters in a longitudinal, population-based sample of young French Canadian adults using two multivariate regression models.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>One broad (Compulsivity: OR = 2.0; 95% CI 1.2–3.5) and one narrow personality trait (anxiousness: OR = 1.1; 95% CI 1.01–1.1) differentiated between individuals with histories of repeated and one-time suicide attempts. Affective instability [(OR = 1.1; 95% CI 1.04–1.1)] and anxiousness [(OR = .92; 95% CI .88–.95)], on the other hand, differentiated between nonattempters and one-time suicide attempters.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Emotional and cognitive dysregulation and associated behavioural manifestations may be associated with suicide attempts of different severity. While findings associated with narrow traits may be easier to interpret and link to existing sociobiological theories, larger effect sizes associated with broad traits such as Compulsivity may be better suited to objectives with a more clinical focus.</p

    Bred or wild participation

    No full text
    International audienc

    Le dialogue et l’enquĂȘte du public

    No full text
    Le contexte politique contemporain est marquĂ© par l’essor d’une participation dĂ©mocratique des citoyens Ă  des processus de discussion et de dĂ©cision identifiĂ©s Ă  un « nouvel esprit de la dĂ©mocratie » (Blondiaux, 2008). Cette demande de participation parfois diffuse est reconnue dans le droit europĂ©en et national et s’est concrĂ©tisĂ©e notamment dans des dispositifs institutionnels (dĂ©bat public, confĂ©rence de citoyens, etc.). Elle Ă©merge dĂ©sormais dans le champ de la gouvernance publique (État,..

    Bred or wild participation

    No full text
    International audienc

    Spontaniczna czy konstruowana partycypacja?

    No full text
    The development of the participation proposal for French citizens leads us to examine whether state organized participatory democracy hinders socialchange. The taking over of deliberation and participation functions by state and corporate bodies through regulations and initiatives such as participatory devices seems to both stimulate and channel citizen participation in decision making processes. More and more scholars study these institutional devices, criticizing the “procedural tropism” [Mazeaud, 2011] observed in the literature. Indeed, the proceduralization of citizen participation over the last years, embodied in established and standardized devices which are controlled by a public or administrative institution, is of great social significance. Those standardized forms of debate, conceived in a top down approach by state and public bodies are also becoming compulsory in different fields of public action. Environmental law recent developments in France for instance are increasingly calling for citizens’ inclusion, as well as urban planning. This institutionalization process produces at least two main types of consequences. According to Fourniau and Blondiaux [2011] it “coincides first of all with a renunciation of a large-scale social change”. These participative settings multiply and are often localized and time limited. They are aimed at what Fung [2003] calls the “mini public”. They do not allow sufficiently broad and concrete deliberative structures which enable real citizen expression. At the same time proceduralization usually gives control over participation to the authorities who organize it. The way in which they frame power, stage public meetings and animation choices reduces the margin of uncertainty which maintains openness and freedom of speech at debates. We have already highlighted this institutional issue and its political consequences for public debate [Revel, 2007]. Can we suggest that the shape of the participatory devices contributes to defining the form of justifiable public participation? The opposing argument about public debate proposed by Mermet [2007] lies in between “wild democracy” and “bred democracy”.RozwĂłj projektu obywatelskiej partycypacji we Francji prowadzi do zbadania znanego z literatury „tropizmu proceduralnego” [Mazaud, 2011]. Proceduralizacja obywatelskiego uczestnictwa urzeczywist niana za poƛrednictwem ustalonych i st andardowych pomysƂów, kontro lowana pr zez publiczne lub administr acyjne instytucje, jest w ost atnich latach najwaĆŒniejszym faktem spoƂecznym. Celem tego artykuƂu jest ocena widocznych efektĂłw instytucjonalizacji i proceduralizacji partycypacji obywatelskiej w publicznej akcji we Francji. Proces instytucjonalizacji powoduje co najmniej dwa rodzaje skutkĂłw. Wg Fourniau i Blondiaux [2011] przede wszystkim ona „wspóƂgra z pojawieniem się zmiany spoƂecznej o szerokiej skali”. Przejawy partycypacji są często lokalizowane w ograniczonym czasie. Fung [2003] nazywa je „mini public”. Nie prowadzą do szerokiej deliberacji i do konkretnej formy, pozwalającej na rzetelną ekspresję obywateli. Do innych skutkĂłw naleĆŒy to, ĆŒe proceduralizacja zazwyczaj umoĆŒliwia kontrolowanie partycypacji przez wƂadze. Ich siƂa, spotkania publiczne i sposoby dziaƂania redukują marg ines niepewnoƛci, co prowadzi do utrzymania otwartej debaty i wolnoƛci sƂowa. W ten sposĂłb podkreƛlono wagę instytucjonalizacji i jej polityczne skutki dla debaty publicznej [Revel, 2007]. Czy moĆŒemy sądzić, ĆŒe ksztaƂt projektu partycypacji przyczynia się do zdefiniowania publicznoƛci i form partycypacji? Mermet [2007] zaproponowaƂ okreƛlenie debaty publicznej jako opozycji między „dziką” (spontaniczną) demokracją i „bred” (konstruowaną) demokracją

    Joëlle Zask, Participer. Essai sur les formes démocratiques de la participation

    No full text
    « Il incombe aux sociĂ©tĂ©s d’assurer la participation de leurs membres en mettant Ă  leur disposition les mĂ©thodes, outils, ressources, qui leur permettent de s’intĂ©grer, non seulement sans qu’ils aient Ă  sacrifier leur individualitĂ©, mais en outre, en jouissant d’opportunitĂ©s de dĂ©veloppement personnel » (p 278). JoĂ«lle Zask, connue pour ses travaux sur le pragmatisme, et la thĂ©orie de la justice de Dewey, nous invite cette fois Ă  un voyage dans l’univers de la participation, qu’elle dĂ©coupe e..

    Prologue. Quelles critiques du dialogue ?

    No full text
    Il faut « entamer, poursuivre, entretenir, approfondir, renforcer le dialogue », mĂȘme s’il est possible de le « rompre » et de le « reprendre », de « renouer ses fils » afin de ne pas en rester Ă  un « dialogue avorté », ou pire, un « dialogue de sourds » oĂč il se trouverait alors « dans l’impasse » ; il faut aussi « instituer » ou « institutionnaliser le dialogue social », instaurer un « dialogue des cultures » face aux pĂ©rils du « choc des civilisations », ferment de la guerre ouverte qui si..
    corecore